RPM or Die Deterioration.

Comments

• ricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

  February 11, 2012 6:39AM

  While not an expert on this, I would say, based on what I have read, an RPM. Cheers, RickO

  0
• MonteCarlo Posts: 142

  February 11, 2012 6:40AM

  I vote RPM as well.

  0
• BigDowgie Posts: 1,779 ✭✭✭✭

  February 11, 2012 6:46AM

  Not seeing the notch, I would vote strike doubling. The second D looks flat and shelf-like.

  0
• ModCrewman Posts: 4,041 ✭✭✭✭✭

  February 11, 2012 7:08AM

  
  
  << <i>Not seeing the notch, I would vote strike doubling. The second D looks flat and shelf-like. >>
  
  

  0
• MsMorrisine Posts: 35,745 ✭✭✭✭✭

  February 11, 2012 7:22AM

  Year???
  
  I'm thinking RPM because I see nothing like shelf doubling anywhere else.
  
  

  Current maintainer of Stone's Master List of Favorite Websites // My BST transactions

  0
• howards Posts: 1,241 ✭✭✭

  February 11, 2012 7:56AM

  I was going to vote strike doubling based on the appearance of the D, but I see no similar doubling on any surrounding elements like I would usually expect with strike doubling. So a qualified "maybe" on it being an RPM. Would really want to look at it under a microscope.

  Howard
  http://www.shieldnickels.net

  0
• CaptHenway Posts: 32,711 ✭✭✭✭✭

  February 11, 2012 8:01AM

  
  
  << <i>I was going to vote strike doubling based on the appearance of the D, but I see no similar doubling on any surrounding elements like I would usually expect with strike doubling. So a qualified "maybe" on it being an RPM. Would really want to look at it under a microscope. >>
  
  
  
  The angle at which a design element, such as a mint mark, rises out of the field can make that element more susceptible to machine element than another nearby design element, such as the torch, that rises out of the field at a much shallower angle.
  
  My guess is machine doubling.
  
  TD

  Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.

  0
• JRocco Posts: 14,277 ✭✭✭✭✭

  February 11, 2012 8:42AM

  
  
  << <i>
  
  << <i>I was going to vote strike doubling based on the appearance of the D, but I see no similar doubling on any surrounding elements like I would usually expect with strike doubling. So a qualified "maybe" on it being an RPM. Would really want to look at it under a microscope. >>
  
  
  
  The angle at which a design element, such as a mint mark, rises out of the field can make that element more susceptible to machine element than another nearby design element, such as the torch, that rises out of the field at a much shallower angle.
  
  My guess is machine doubling.
  
  TD >>
  
  
  
  I concur

  Some coins are just plain "Interesting"

  0
• atarian Posts: 3,116 ✭

  February 11, 2012 11:04AM

  1963D on the year
  

  Founder of the NDCCA. *WAM Count : 025. *NDCCA Database Count : 2,610. *You suck 6/24/10. In memory of Tiggar 5/21/1994 - 5/28/2010
  
  

  0
• ProofArtworkonCircs Posts: 4,223 ✭

  February 11, 2012 11:15AM

  <<The angle at which a design element, such as a mint mark, rises out of the field can make that element more susceptible to machine element than another nearby design element, such as the torch, that rises out of the field at a much shallower angle.
  
  My guess is machine doubling.
  
  TD >>
  
  Washington quarters were also noted for this effect - mint mark only showing strike doubling.
  
  

  0